Related
I know A free one is in development.but I cannot find any other information on it. Any idea when more info will be released?
Sent from my eris
Not psx4droid right?
Sent from my Eris using XDA App
I know one is out, but don't expect it to work on the eris. Its going to need a decent gpu.
Yeah, it doesn't work well on the Eris a little laggy-- but i just tried it with Chrono Cross maybe different games have better frame rates? Hope this helps!
They say they might be coming out with dual core snapdragons in the near future. I can't wait! DS games on my phone might be cool.
This will be a million times better with a dual core processor.
Processor doesn't make a phone though. GPU's in phones need to come a long way to really see the affects of 2gHz processors. Honestly I don't care if you have 4 gHz in your phone, if you have the ram of an Eris it won't be that much speedier then an Eris. All things need to be improved or else it is just a bottle-neck.
Well this is almost certainly like computer emulation where it's nearly 100% based on CPU and the GPU does virtually nothing. The threads just aren't sent through the GPU on an emulator because it's way too complication. So two cores will in fact have a very large thread on multithreaded emulation.
Yeah, I see where you're coming from there. I read online that if you had hardware 10x the original, you could emulate a device perfectly. Technically that makes the DS an ok candidate for a snapdragon phone. The DS has two processors that clock at 67 and 33 mHz. That makes it having 100mHz of processor. (I was surprised how little of a processor it actually has.) Do the math. If a snapdragon clocks at 1024mHz (1gHz) then 1000mHz would emulate it fine. That's all hypothetically speaking though. Games would probably still lag on a Droid X or Incredible. Could happen. I just don't know about buttons. On the droid you could map them to letters but on the Eris... Where do buttons go?
PSX, maybe that could be nice, but when my phone can emulate Gamecube and Xbox1, times will be good.
The issue is that dual core processors are exponentially faster than single core. A dual core 500 mhz processor does not equate a single core 1ghz processor in fact it's much closer to a 2ghz processor in benchmark scores if not higher.
I thought the complete opposite. Dual 1.5gHz vs. 3gHz, 3 gets the win for me. My lappy is a dual 2.13gHz and it doesn't seem like 4.26. Just my thoughts, I haven't actually run tests to verify this. Computing wise, a lot of applications only use one core. There in lies the problem with dual core. Plus, why do you call that an issue?
Well it's simply an issue at the moment because of the fact that phones only have one core is all.
And dual cores will always outpower single cores because of the increase in L3 cache size, which literally does not exist on a single core processor. The L3 Cache increases the speed of a dual or multi core processor by quite a lot.
edit: And a lot of emulators utilize multicores, if not all.
Just saying, this is a huge step forward though. It's just a matter of splitting the threads.
CPCookieMan said:
I just don't know about buttons. On the droid you could map them to letters but on the Eris... Where do buttons go?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The best solution for this would be using another controller with bluetooth. I know most of the iphone (and a few of the android) emulators can sync with a wiimote to avoid awful on-screen buttons.
hey all
i thought id share with you for those who would be interested in my first hands on experience with the samsung galaxy s2
well i went round my friends house after work, as he was waiting for one to be delivered as an upgrade, anyway he rang me to say that it was here,
so i thought id go up and have alook.
the first thing i did when he gave it me was.... drop it lol
he passed it me and it slipped right through my fingers it was so thin
it bounced on his hard laminated floor a few times but he just laughed.
it is a nice device, very slim altho abit wider than the play
the brightness on the screen was great
and it was very very snappy scrolling across homescreens and loading up apps,
exploring the memory with astro. i was impressed
and alot lighter than the play aswell
the quadrant scores were off the chart getting something like 3k+
linpack he was getting 48
i did notice that when running quadrant some of the textures were just plain solid shapes no actual textures. i thought maybe thats got something to do with that mali chipset that i heard didnt support certain texture compression but anyway.
i told him to fire up fpse to see what that ran like with the new fpse.
mines runs great hovering around at around 45-50fps
on most games. until i put on screen filtering
and that has a massive impact on fps it drops to around
27-30fps and games become unplayable even with frame skip on max
enhanced 3d rendering has little effect on fps so i keep that on
anyway i thought that the galaxy s 2 with the 1.2 dualcore and the mali 400mp
would power along when putting screen filtering on.
so i tried tekken 3 loaded it up. ran it but without screen filtering on
and it was buttery smooth stuck at 60fps.
then i turned on screen filtering and it dropped to 30/35fps
and was the same unplayable state mine was.
i was gob smacked surely a dualcore would best this???
my mate said, so looks like your not missing much gaming wise then compared to mine. i just smiled ,he hasnt got his for gaming mind.
i dont know if there was summat goin on, or a imcompatability with fpse
but it was an interesting discovery. i tried afew other games and they all were the same.
so as far as emulation and fpse goes were not getting left behind because we have no dualcore cpu.
Someone please correct me here if im wrong but what your saying is that a dual core cpu is the same speed as a single core cpu on single core programming, well yes that is going to be the obvous result, yes different single core speeds will have various results.
But unless a program has been coded for use with more than one processor then it will not make use of a dual core processor.
for example
a single core processor can work out
x = 5
y = ?
x * y = 15
this equation would take as much time on a single core processor as it would a dual core processor as you are waiting for the result of 15/x to work out what y is.
so until FPSE is programmed to allocate for dual core processors you will end up with the same speed of use, or very similar.
I have both, well sort off, play dead gone for repairing with sony, so bought S2 in the mean time, to tell you, S2 with 1gb RAM and Dual core Processor which can be overclocked to stable 1.66 ghz is way fast as compared to play, trust me, graphic wise both have 16m colors, but s2 with super amoled does it somehow better...i miss playing games the play way...thats all...I guess S2 is the world's fastest stable phone for now.....atleast I have both so know it...
shotgunfool said:
Someone please correct me here if im wrong but what your saying is that a dual core cpu is the same speed as a single core cpu on single core programming, well yes that is going to be the obvous result, yes different single core speeds will have various results.
But unless a program has been coded for use with more than one processor then it will not make use of a dual core processor.
for example
a single core processor can work out
x = 5
y = ?
x * y = 15
this equation would take as much time on a single core processor as it would a dual core processor as you are waiting for the result of 15/x to work out what y is.
so until FPSE is programmed to allocate for dual core processors you will end up with the same speed of use, or very similar.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
your forgetting about the more onboard ram the s2 has plus it has the mali 400mp Gpu
crispyduckling said:
your forgetting about the more onboard ram the s2 has plus it has the mali 400mp Gpu
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The tegra2 bests that GPU in every possible way.
Also doesn't the SGS II have an FPS limit.
Also Exynos as a whole is not all that more powerful than tegra2 I mean the reason the SGS II does so well on benchmarks is because of android 2.3 look at the Atrix 2.3 leak its benchmarks are off the charts as well.
And my last point. There is no need for all this power if it is not going to be used. I mean games need that type of power and games are best played with a gamepad. Why sony ericsson didn't put a tegra in the play is beyond me.
I tried tekken on it, could see puches coming at me my thumbb was always in the way. I told the owner to uninstall as gaming on something like that was a joke. He didnt agree until he tried my play.
Sent from my R800a using XDA Premium App
RacecarBMW said:
The tegra2 bests that GPU in every possible way.
Also doesn't the SGS II have an FPS limit.
Also Exynos as a whole is not all that more powerful than tegra2 I mean the reason the SGS II does so well on benchmarks is because of android 2.3 look at the Atrix 2.3 leak its benchmarks are off the charts as well.
And my last point. There is no need for all this power if it is not going to be used. I mean games need that type of power and games are best played with a gamepad. Why sony ericsson didn't put a tegra in the play is beyond me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yea I tried to play tekken and I just couldn't on the touch screen
IM so glad I have a play
its a great phone tho the gs2
crispyduckling said:
yea I tried to play tekken and I just couldn't on the touch screen
IM so glad I have a play
its a great phone tho the gs2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Reason I switched too.
Sent from my R800i using XDA App
Touchscreens suck for gaming.
No amount of processing power in the World will overcome this fact.
I am interested in how the graphics compare to the iphone 4S in real life. Like, is it that noticable?
I know the iPhones have optimization and all but with the Mali 400MP will i notice much difference compared 2 the iPhone 4S graphics? Iv seen all the benchmarks and i know iphone 4s is up to 2x faster then Mali 400 but will it be noticable??
It's not really noticeable, but the iPhone 4S is the first phone to have a dual-core graphics chip (gpu) so it can handle any game thrown at it. In my opinion playing games on the S2 is much more enjoyable because of the bigger screen and because of Super Amoled Plus. However if your buying a smartphone for games... then something is wrong with you haha
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
actually i think the samsungs were the first 2 have a dual core gpu... and alot of people buy a smartphone for games.. its tasken over DS and PSP in market share for handheld gaming...cant argue with statistics
Technically, the A5 chip is better for graphics. However the most important factor here is that games are better on iOS. If you want to play on mobile, go iOS no questions asked. Since the GS2 screen is bigger, it's more comfortable to play, but games are late to release on Android.
freemini said:
Technically, the A5 chip is better for graphics. However the most important factor here is that games are better on iOS. If you want to play on mobile, go iOS no questions asked. Since the GS2 screen is bigger, it's more comfortable to play, but games are late to release on Android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah, i can wait for the games to release but i just want 2 know how much noticably worse the graphics will be, if at all?
and iphone 4s only ha 512mb of RAM.. will that matter?
Only 512 mb of ram will matter in the long run. Even if the games this time next year would be playable thanks to the GPU, they will lag due to the lack of RAM -- otherwise iPhone 5 wouldn't have any selling point.
As for GPU performance, despite being newer the A5 is hardly better: http://www.glbenchmark.com/compare....Apple iPhone 4S&D2=Samsung GT-i9100 Galaxy S2
The next generation A6 and Mali are most likely to double the performance.
The mali-400 use a quad-core configuration.
http://www.arm.com/products/multimedia/mali-graphics-hardware/mali-400-mp.php
peterdan1506 said:
yeah, i can wait for the games to release but i just want 2 know how much noticably worse the graphics will be, if at all?
and iphone 4s only ha 512mb of RAM.. will that matter?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i have a iphone 4 and galaxy s2 as my main phones, i like playing games a lot and for that i use the iphone, games are smoother, better optimised , better looking ( on retina) and get updated faster if there are problems, that has a simple answer, developers have to develop for 5 hardware versions with are very similar anyway not like on android wich has hundreds of hardware versions, and games are can not be tested on all of them.
Check ShadowGun for Galaxy S2 and judge it for your self
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
ephraim033 said:
Check ShadowGun for Galaxy S2 and judge it for your self
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol i got this yesterday - sick as f***
Bulletstorm vs gears of war.
Also Riptide GP has super graphics too!
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
Shadowgun's available for ios too but I bet the developer spent an lot less time on it than the Android versions
peterdan1506 said:
I am interested in how the graphics compare to the iphone 4S in real life. Like, is it that noticable?
I know the iPhones have optimization and all but with the Mali 400MP will i notice much difference compared 2 the iPhone 4S graphics? Iv seen all the benchmarks and i know iphone 4s is up to 2x faster then Mali 400 but will it be noticable??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
IMO it's very noticeable. My wife has the i4S so I've spent a good bit of time comparing. Gaming is on a whole other level with the i4S. Not sure if it's because the apps are better optimized or the gpu is just that much better. Asphalt 6, shadow gun, dead space all have a richer gameplay experience from graphics, to character control etc. Then you have games like Modern Combat 3 and Real Racing and atm there's just nothing on the android platform that's comparable.
One of the bad things for the Mali MP400(Or in that context the way it's implemented in the Galaxy S II) is its clocking mechanism(It's in no way a mechanism,I know,but I try to simplify things a lot).The GPU's clock must be 800MHz divided by an integer.So the next two options are 400MHz(800/2) and then 267MHz(800/3).So,because 400Mhz is a 50% overclocked state so to speak,Sammy had to stick with 267Mhz.If I remember well,the Tegra 2's Geforce ULP runs at 333Mhz(and still gets pretty much raped) and the overclocked to death version of the PowerVR SGX540 in the RAZR runs at 384MHz and STILL is worse.That's because we are all comparing stock handsets.My SGS2 with 400MHz GPU kicks the crap of all the aformentioned phones.
As for talks about dual-core GPU,it's a little more complex than that.GPUs are from their nature multi-core devices,but not in the way CPUs are.They use pixel shader cores,vertex shader cores and so on.In that manner,the Mali MP400 is quad-core and the GeForce ULP is octa-core.The SGX545 in the iPhone 4S is more like dual GPU.Still,we don't know how it's clocked.Plus,the SII is 6 months older.So,if we also take into consideration that last year's Desire HD with its relatively crappy(Compared to new ones) GPU plays all graphics intensive games smoothly,no,the SII won't suck for a long time.
Long post but for some it may be a worth read.
Bec07 said:
Only 512 mb of ram will matter in the long run. Even if the games this time next year would be playable thanks to the GPU, they will lag due to the lack of RAM -- otherwise iPhone 5 wouldn't have any selling point.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nonsense. It's a stupid little mobile phone - if twice as much RAM as a PS3 can't do it, the programmers really should find another job.
MoWa22 said:
Nonsense. It's a stupid little mobile phone - if twice as much RAM as a PS3 can't do it, the programmers really should find another job.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can't just talk out of your gut like that.
There's so much to consider in to account. Firstly being the PS3 has a harddrive to compensate for the ram. So that's the hardware dilemma covered.
And the second; there are more console gaming developers than there are mobile gaming developers due to mobile gaming being a new generation and developers would rather go for the easy option than spend hours and resources thinking about what they can fit on a 3.7 inch screen.
The third among many reasons; target audience for consoles are broad. You don't have 5 year olds owning a 4S. Hence momentum on gaming market for consoles is still in it's peak. And if you ask me, playing MW3 or BF3 on an iPhone would be suicidal.
danielsf said:
The mali-400 use a quad-core configuration.
http://www.arm.com/products/multimedia/mali-graphics-hardware/mali-400-mp.php
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, the Mali 400 uses 1 vertex unit and 4 pixel units. Having 4 pixel units lead it to be called quad-core (probably for marketing purposes), but it is not true quad core. Hence the reason why the iPhone 4s' true dual-core still outperforms it.
Bec07 said:
Only 512 mb of ram will matter in the long run. Even if the games this time next year would be playable thanks to the GPU, they will lag due to the lack of RAM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
PS3 has 512MB total RAM. It's not the amount that matters, it's how you use it
What I mean is, developers will be optimizing their games for what resources they have. Hence, I don't think there will be any performance problems next year.
Actually I thought that sgs2 kicked iphone 4s' ass...
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA App
No matter what people here might say, i might get flamed for this but...
If you want to play games, get an iphone 4s, Simple as that. Specs aside (yes GPU wise the a5 is faster than mali400 anyway), iOs is much better for gaming, more games. and higher quality games. not to mention games usually arrive on ios faster than they make it to android.
/flame shield on.
you both terribly wrong ;-)
1/ the ps3 has good cpus/gpus despite the age
2/ the ps3 only runs the game and optimized for gaming (including the dev tools and the apis)
3/the phone runs a lot of other things that the ps3 doesn't even have hardware for (starting by: how do you think the phone receives calls and messages even thus ur playing a game?)
4/the phones also have a runtime on top
5/phones have non voltile memory too
and please realize that ram has nothing to do with raw power, its just a fast access memory. means the more stuff you run the more ram you need.
eventually, ram is used to compensate loading times or how much data you can process at once, but that's not always as relevent
Hi there!
I am in the hunt for a 7"-8" Android 4/4.1 tablet. Currently my choices are the new Acer Iconia A110 (because of a microSD card slot), the Motorola Xoom 2 Media Edition (because of the bigger screen, excellent build and virtual surround sound), the Samsung Galaxy Tab 7.7 (again with a slightly bigger screen, a microSD card slot and an excellent AMOLED screen) and the top dog Google Nexus 7. But i am more interested with the Nexus 7 in terms of "Is it worth the investment" even on a small screen?. I will be using the thing mainly for checking email/news/weather, the usual Youtube, WIkipedia, Twitter, watching movies and also gaming. So, i'd like to ask:
1, Is the actual GPU dual or single channel? And what's the frequency? Does it matter?
2. Is the 1.3Ghz the base CPU speed? Or is it underclocked like what Apple is doing with its tabs?
3. Aside from connecting a mice or keyboard what other stuff can the Bluetooth 3.0 standard do?
4. Is it capable of wireless file transfer to & from a Macbook?
5. I'm aware that it doesn't have Flash but can i still install them via the Google Play?
6. Are they stereo speakers? Capable of surround sound? (some sound issues in some models i heard)
Please advice. Thanks.
gino_76ph said:
Hi there!
I am in the hunt for a 7"-8" Android 4/4.1 tablet. Currently my choices are the new Acer Iconia A110 (because of a microSD card slot), the Motorola Xoom 2 Media Edition (because of the bigger screen, excellent build and virtual surround sound), the Samsung Galaxy Tab 7.7 (again with a slightly bigger screen, a microSD card slot and an excellent AMOLED screen) and the top dog Google Nexus 7. But i am more interested with the Nexus 7 in terms of "Is it worth the investment" even on a small screen?. I will be using the thing mainly for checking email/news/weather, the usual Youtube, WIkipedia, Twitter, watching movies and also gaming. So, i'd like to ask:
1, Is the actual GPU dual or single channel? And what's the frequency? Does it matter?
2. Is the 1.3Ghz the base CPU speed? Or is it underclocked like what Apple is doing with its tabs?
3. Aside from connecting a mice or keyboard what other stuff can the Bluetooth 3.0 standard do?
4. Is it capable of wireless file transfer to & from a Macbook?
5. I'm aware that it doesn't have Flash but can i still install them via the Google Play?
6. Are they stereo speakers? Capable of surround sound? (some sound issues in some models i heard)
Please advice. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. Its either dual or quad I think clocked at 450 or something(can be over clocked)
2. Underclocked I think(prime has same CPU but at 1.5)
3. Don't know
4. There's a few apps that do this
5. No you have to sideload
6. Stereo and don't know about surround sound
Sent from my Jelly Nexus S
Would it matter if a tablet has dual or single channel GPU? Does it matter if the wifi is dual or single band? WIll it actually help make the graphics "better" and surfing the net faster?
Would you trust Acer when it comes to build quality of its tablets compared to say samsung or Motorola?
1. Not sure(I think I heard about it being overclocked somewhere)
2. Default is 1.2ghz, can be overclocked up to 1.5ghz.
3. For example: File transfer. If you root you can also use it as a PlayStation controller with BluePutDroid.
4. There are a number of ways to do this, I would recommend AirDroid.
5. To get flash(no root required):
A. Go to settings->security and enable unknown sources.
B. Download and install the flash apk on your device from here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1763805
C. Get a browser that supports flash like boat browser(from play store).
6. Stereo, probably not surround sound.
(Second post)
Not sure what dual channel GPU means to tell you the truth.
I believe the nexus 7 has dual channel WiFi, using speed test app the speed reaches or goes above my maximum speed from the other end of the house.
gino_76ph said:
1, Is the actual GPU dual or single channel? And what's the frequency? Does it matter?
2. Is the 1.3Ghz the base CPU speed? Or is it underclocked like what Apple is doing with its tabs?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is no such thing as a single or dual channel GPU. Channels refers to the RAM. It is a 12 core GPU.
1.3ghz is the maximum clock speed of the specific CPU used, the T30L. It is not underclocked.
this is the truth after reading some ****.no single or dual gpu.12 core has.channel intended only for the ram.this is the minor tegra3 out there,less freq. clock but high clocked ram and not the same as t30 packed.begginnning with the fact the clock cpu freq. is overcloccable without problems,the ram packed on n7 is IMHO better than ad example tf201 or htconex one's
Are you guys certain there is no such thing as single or dual channel CPU?
And If the GPU clocked speed is 1.3Ghz would it mean that there is 1.3Ghz on each of the 12 cores?
gino_76ph said:
Are you guys certain there is no such thing as single or dual channel CPU?
And If the GPU clocked speed is 1.3Ghz would it mean that there is 1.3Ghz on each of the 12 cores?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no you are wrong man.the CPU(4cores) is clocked at 1.3 ghz (4 cores running) and 1.5 (or 1.4 i don't remeber)in single mode (1 core running)
the GPU (12cores)is clocked at 416 mhz by default
apart them,if you flash a custom kernel,this Soc can reach (depending on tab,they aren't exactly the same chips)1.8\2.0 ghz for the CPU,and 484\520\600\650\700\750 with the GPU (here depending on tab as well)
I see. So, it is fast?
As a side question would it be practical to buy a new or latest tablet like the Nexus 7 than an older (and equally good in its own) say Galaxy Tab 7.7 or the Xoom 2 Media Edition? What i'm trying to ask here is the "problem" of compatibility with apps and games if a tab has an older GPU in them.
Would that be an issue or not?
yes,sure it's fast!a little bit faster than others with same chip.i do you an example regards the last question.
there are peoples with old gpus,that continue playing hd games with these old gpu without problems (not all games working,but many of them!).an example is the galaxy nexus that i own,it 's packed with a good cpu and a old gpu,that we found also on galaxy s,nexus s ecc,but honestly i never found a game that doesn't work for the odl gpu.i have also tegra2 devices,no prob with games,surely a tegra3 is more powerfull and you can play games with full effect enabled without problems.all apps works,not depending to gpu,but only the version of OS at least.
The Tegra 3 SoC only has a single channel memory. Specs are 1GB RAM of DDR3L -1333 MHz (Low Voltage) giving a total memory bandwidth of 5.3 GB/s, is this super fast, no, but it is more than than sufficient for the Nexus 7 display resolution.
To the OP, don't get stressed about specs, especially if you're 100% sure what they actually mean. The important part is user experience of the Nexus 7, due in part to Android Jelly Bean, it is smooth and enjoyable, it can play all the latest games well, I also run Playstation & N64 emulators on it without issue.
Finally, The Nexus 7 is fully unlockable, so it has great developer support on XDA and other forums, which is 50% of the device's appeal in my eyes. If you can wait a few weeks, the rumour is a 32 GB model will replace the current 16 GB version.
If you can manage to find a Nexus 7 used on Craigs or Ebay, I would do it. I got my perfect condition barely used 16gb for $160 from a buyer's remorse user on Craigslist. For this price I find the tablet to be very good. I would have a harder time paying the $250 plus tax in store for the same unit. Not that it's not worth the $250 but already owning a Galaxy S3 phone, it's too much of the same at the end of the day, much like I experienced when I had a iPhone and iPad together.
The Nexus7 for me is a great grab and go device for quick browsing, game playing, weather checking, etc.
If you've got to have the latest and fastest specs, the Tegra3 is getting dated already and you'd want to find something with a Qualcomm S4 chip (even this isn't really faster than Tegra3). Supposedly the OMAP 4470 in the bigger Fire HD and the Nook HD+ might be a little faster for more money.
i doubt 4470 it's faster than tegra3 (all 3 variant)..it's basically a 4460 with a bit more clock freq.,same 45nm tecnology and with a faster gpu (with dedicated 2d hw chipset).they claim it's up to 2 times more faster than sgx540.if it's true,i think that tegra3 is better (not for the quad).Anyway i have to agree with all the things sad in previous posts.OP don't care about spec,a nexus device is fast for many others things that i don't write,already sad,and also if tegra3 it's becoming an "old" chipset compared to new out this days,it performs very well with an optimized OS.wait for the 32gb version and never ever think only about cpu\gpu specs :good:
sert00 said:
i doubt 4470 it's faster than tegra3 (all 3 variant)..it's basically a 4460 with a bit more clock freq.,same 45nm tecnology and with a faster gpu (with dedicated 2d hw chipset).they claim it's up to 2 times more faster than sgx540.if it's true,i think that tegra3 is better (not for the quad).Anyway i have to agree with all the things sad in previous posts.OP don't care about spec,a nexus device is fast for many others things that i don't write,already sad,and also if tegra3 it's becoming an "old" chipset compared to new out this days,it performs very well with an optimized OS.wait for the 32gb version and never ever think only about cpu\gpu specs :good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A full fat OMAP 4470 is faster than the Tegra 3. I read a review of the Archos 101 XS which runs an OMAP 4470 @ 1.5 GHz (GPU 384 MHz)
In the ultra demanding GL Benchmark 2.5 - Egypt HD (Offscreen 1080p)
Nexus 7 = 8.9 FPS
Archos = 11 FPS
Transformer Infinity = 11 FPS
There is scope for the 4470 to run at 1.8 GHz, but that is probably only for larger devices like Windows RT tablet, Amazon apparently have clocked it at 1.5 GHz. Overall in a tough benchmark the N7 is slower, however the Transformer Infinity is the same speed, which is basically as fast as an easily overclocked Nexus. As the OMAP is a dual-core, in theory a game developed specially for our Nexus (Tegra Zone?) could be faster or more feature packed in terms of physics etc, if it use all 4 cores.
Turbotab said:
A full fat OMAP 4470 is faster than the Tegra 3. I read a review of the Archos 101 XS which runs an OMAP 4470 @ 1.5 GHz (GPU 384 MHz)
In the ultra demanding GL Benchmark 2.5 - Egypt HD (Offscreen 1080p)
Nexus 7 = 8.9 FPS
Archos = 11 FPS
Transformer Infinity = 11 FPS
There is scope for the 4470 to run at 1.8 GHz, but that is probably only for larger devices like Windows RT tablet, Amazon apparently have clocked it at 1.5 GHz. Overall in a tough benchmark the N7 is slower, however the Transformer Infinity is the same speed, which is basically as fast as an easily overclocked Nexus. As the OMAP is a dual-core, in theory a game developed specially for our Nexus (Tegra Zone?) could be faster or more feature packed in terms of physics etc, if it use all 4 cores.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
months ago the 4470 was supposed to run at 1.7 ghz.i remember when i bought the gnex in november 2011 that 4430 is at 1.2\4460 at 1.5\4470 at 1.7.theese number was in the official omap site and guide line referments.only after being out the fact of the 4460 bug (major part of them,wasn't capable of 1.5 ghz,and this Soc it isn't a downclocked one,from 1.5 to 1.2 by google.it's a 1.2 cpu.)they change also in the site some numbers.now the 4460 is at 1.2 and the 4470 there's write 1.3+,in this case of the archos 1.5.what a strange thing from omap!i saw same anandtech reviwe like you sad times ago,but honestly i think that in the total of bench that regularly they do,there are some in favor of 4470,and some in favor of tegra3,at least depending also if referred to cpu or gpu.with 4460 they did a good job,i really like it,but after have a look at 4460\70 documentation,seems that in term of cpu,there aren't so much differences.if i clock my 4460 at 1.5\16,do a bench and compare with a same bench do with a 4470,i think that the most differences are gpu related..and when i compare my bench with n7 and gnex,in term of cpu and both ultra-tweaked i see a big gap in scores...it's for that i continue to think in the total user exp and bench scores as well tegra3 remain more powerfull.but certainly the differences aren't visible by end user..but with bench at least and in th end what really count it's how's the user experience,not bench
sert00 said:
months ago the 4470 was supposed to run at 1.7 ghz.i remember when i bought the gnex in november 2011 that 4430 is at 1.2\4460 at 1.5\4470 at 1.7.theese number was in the official omap site and guide line referments.only after being out the fact of the 4460 bug (major part of them,wasn't capable of 1.5 ghz,and this Soc it isn't a downclocked one,from 1.5 to 1.2 by google.it's a 1.2 cpu.)they change also in the site some numbers.now the 4460 is at 1.2 and the 4470 there's write 1.3+,in this case of the archos 1.5.what a strange thing from omap!i saw same anandtech reviwe like you sad times ago,but honestly i think that in the total of bench that regularly they do,there are some in favor of 4470,and some in favor of tegra3,at least depending also if referred to cpu or gpu.with 4460 they did a good job,i really like it,but after have a look at 4460\70 documentation,seems that in term of cpu,there aren't so much differences.if i clock my 4460 at 1.5\16,do a bench and compare with a same bench do with a 4470,i think that the most differences are gpu related..and when i compare my bench with n7 and gnex,in term of cpu and both ultra-tweaked i see a big gap in scores...it's for that i continue to think in the total user exp and bench scores as well tegra3 remain more powerfull.but certainly the differences aren't visible by end user..but with bench at least and in th end what really count it's how's the user experience,not bench
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
An area the 4470 does hold a significant advantage over Tegra 3 is memory bandwidth, as it utilises dual-channel memory, hopefully Tegra 4 will sort out that deficiency. Ultimately the OMAP's GPU is not powerful enough to be bandwidth limited anyway, overall I like the Tegra 3 from a UX perspective, looking forward to a Tegra 4 in the next Nexus 7 v2:good:
Using a nexus 7 now. Very happy with the money I paid for it. In terms of spec? This beast will last you for awhile. Even if they are pushing specs already to the next level, it'll be a long time until a quad core 1 gb ram machine will be considered slow.
Simply put, at this price and quality, anyone can buy it and everyone should.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app
Turbotab said:
Finally, The Nexus 7 is fully unlockable, so it has great developer support on XDA and other forums, which is 50% of the device's appeal in my eyes. If you can wait a few weeks, the rumour is a 32 GB model will replace the current 16 GB version.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The 32 gig will be replacing the 8 gig model. Two versions will be available by Christmas: a 16 gig model and a 32 gig model. The 16 will be priced at (or below) $200.00. The 32 will be at (or below) $250.00.
Posted via my Amiga 3000, EVO 3D , or Nexus 7
phillip1953 said:
The 32 gig will be replacing the 8 gig model. Two versions will be available by Christmas: a 16 gig model and a 32 gig model. The 16 will be priced at (or below) $200.00. The 32 will be at (or below) $250.00.
Posted via my Amiga 3000, EVO 3D , or Nexus 7
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have a link confirming that, or is that inside knowledge
It's the logic step for Google. The 32 gig is already being sold and nobody really wants the 8 gig model. To compete with the "other" tablets and to make up for the lack of an SD card slot, it only makes sense.
IOW.....my speculation from 40 years of computer use....starting with the Heathkit H8.
Posted via my Amiga 3000, EVO 3D , or Nexus 7
I assume that the S4 Pro is MUCH faster than anything used in the xbox and ps2. I assume its faster than the 360 and ps3. Is that really the case though? The games look like crap on the current gen consoles and many mobile games are catching up. From a purely specs perspective is the Adreno 320/S4 Pro superior?
I would seriously doubt that but i don't know enough to say that for sure. Sure mobile CPUs are pretty good but they are limited by their thermal envelopes.
Compared to the PS3? NO. the cell processor is very advanced even if it's partly locked down. (there are 2-3 cells that aren't used)
Sent from my PG06100 using Tapatalk 2
Very advanced for 7 years ago. This is 2013 and the S4 Pro has more cores/ram/gpu cores. The PS3 games cant even run in 720p. Most games are upscaled from 960x540.
Eric-1987 said:
Very advanced for 7 years ago. This is 2013 and the S4 Pro has more cores/ram/gpu cores. The PS3 games cant even run in 720p. Most games are upscaled from 960x540.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can't be more wrong. It hasn't got more CPU and GPU cores. It has more RAM but the PS3 doesn't have to run Android. Also, very few PS3 games run at qHD res. One game is Black Ops, but it does this because it runs 60 FPS. Most games nowadays render at 720p or near it.
Also, I have yet to see a mobile game that comes even close to PS3 games nowadays. Maybe some mobile games look better than some PS3 release titles, but that's it.
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app
Yes it does. The PS3 cell processor is single core. The 360 CPU is tri core. And the PS3 runs a form of Linux.
Does it really even matter? If you bought your phone as an alternative to a gaming console or handheld gaming device you bought it for the wrong reason.
Also if you want to compare specs, compare a PS3 or XBox 360 to a phone that came out 7 years ago.
Eric-1987 said:
Yes it does. The PS3 cell processor is single core. The 360 CPU is tri core. And the PS3 runs a form of Linux.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is a single PPE and 8 SPE-s. One SPE is used by the OS and one is locked.
Yes, it does run a form of Linux, but what I originally meant was that its footprint is very small, it only consumes 20-30 MB of RAM compared to Android which needs several hundred MB-s and also CPU power to run background services.
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app
Eric-1987 said:
Yes it does. The PS3 cell processor is single core. The 360 CPU is tri core. And the PS3 runs a form of Linux.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Umm i thought the Cell processor was a "7" core device at 3.2Ghz to boot. Not that clock speed is everything but it puts out 218 G-FLOPS while the 550Mhz GPU (RSX) puts oput 1.8 T-Flops. The Adreno 225 does 12.8 G-FLOPS.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6330/the-iphone-5-review/11
According to the that page, the iPhone 5 GPU is similar to the Adreno 320 and that does 19.2 G-FLOPS. WAAAAY less than the 1.8 (or read 1800 ) T-FLOPS of the RSX.
VRAM data rates are ~20GB/s vs 8GB/s
So yeah, guess we can say that's done for.
shotta35 said:
Umm i thought the Cell processor was a "7" core device at 3.2Ghz to boot. Not that clock speed is everything but it puts out 218 G-FLOPS while the 550Mhz GPU (RSX) puts oput 1.8 T-Flops. The Adreno 225 does 12.8 G-FLOPS.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6330/the-iphone-5-review/11
According to the that page, the iPhone 5 GPU is similar to the Adreno 320 and that does 19.2 G-FLOPS. WAAAAY less than the 1.8 (or read 1800 ) T-FLOPS of the RSX.
VRAM data rates are ~20GB/s vs 8GB/s
So yeah, guess we can say that's done for.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly all this.
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app
shotta35 said:
Umm i thought the Cell processor was a "7" core device at 3.2Ghz to boot. Not that clock speed is everything but it puts out 218 G-FLOPS while the 550Mhz GPU (RSX) puts oput 1.8 T-Flops. The Adreno 225 does 12.8 G-FLOPS.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6330/the-iphone-5-review/11
According to the that page, the iPhone 5 GPU is similar to the Adreno 320 and that does 19.2 G-FLOPS. WAAAAY less than the 1.8 (or read 1800 ) T-FLOPS of the RSX.
VRAM data rates are ~20GB/s vs 8GB/s
So yeah, guess we can say that's done for.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So if thats the case then mobile technology isn't ANYWHERE CLOSE to desktop PC's. My PC DESTROYS a PS3 without even thinking twice. Its like an ant vs my boot.
Eric-1987 said:
So if thats the case then mobile technology isn't ANYWHERE CLOSE to desktop PC's. My PC DESTROYS a PS3 without even thinking twice. Its like an ant vs my boot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct
The N4 is more powerful than a PS2/Xbox though right? My old SGS4G could play PS1 games without flinching.
Eric-1987 said:
The N4 is more powerful than a PS2/Xbox though right? My old SGS4G could play PS1 games without flinching.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pretty sure it's more powerful than either the PS2 or Xbox, but there's no way it would ever emulate them if that's what you're getting at there
Not to mention, the Android OS uses a lot of resources, unlike a simpler console such as those
No way does the RSX put out 1.8 Tflops....
It's basically 6800SLI which gets nowhere near that, the 580 doesn't even get that lol.
The Cell is an overhyped CPU that failed to deliver and in reality CPUs like the 360s Xeon and the I7s we have today are so much better for gaming. Developers just complain about the amount of code the Cell needs compared to conventional CPUs and how it takes too much time. Doesn't matter what you say about it in theory, in practice it costs too much money to develop on and it cost Sony the console war. Fact is we've not see the PS3 out perform the 360, the GPU inside the 360 can push more pixels, has access to more memory too. Games like uncharted use so much trickery to make them look good, I don't understand why people make a big deal out of it, have you seen the obviously jpeg like skyboxes all over it?
Graphics wise the phones are already there, what they lack in power they make up for in memory and new shaders and features to make the games look better. Mobile GPUs also push games at higher framerates and use AA which consoles lack most of the time due to memory constraints. Instead their games use post processing effects which blur everything out and make it look ****. Also mobile games run at 60FPS where as most console games are around 30fps or even lower.
CPU wise mobiles are getting there but still far off, we see the next gen of Arm chips getting close to the I3.
The biggest constraint of the Mobiles though is battery.
Eric-1987 said:
The N4 is more powerful than a PS2/Xbox though right? My old SGS4G could play PS1 games without flinching.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Give it up already. On paper the N4 is great and all for what it is, but it can't compete with a gaming console. Try hooking up your phone to a big screen hdtv and see how it compares graphics wise to a gaming console if you have one. After all, the SGS4G doesn't have a disc drive on it so I don't know how you could play a PS1 game one it. You must only be playing pirated games via a 3 or 4 inch screen to come to the assumption that a cell phone comes close to any of the current gaming consoles graphics wise. Afterall, there is a reason they make cell phones, dvd/bluray players, video game consoles, tvs, etc... They each have their own benefits.
Lets be honest, PS3 games are absolutely shocking. They have so much screen tear, not to mention the actual graphics are completely and utterly awful. It takes an age to load, even it's own dashboard. Xbox 360 is better but still, consoles we have today are absolutely light years behind PC's and even the processors we have in our phones outshine them.
You can quote all the nonsense giga flop teraflop data you want, you would be all talking out your behinds because consoles struggle with the games they have, and with skyrim as an example, are completely and utterly chopped down to run, when compared to the unlocked PC versions with the proper textures.
I have yet to find a PS3 game to run in 1080p which is what it should be coping with, and the 720p games are awful both performance wise, and graphics wise.
As for mobiles on a big screen tv, the LG optimus 3G hooked up to 40 inch hd tv gaming is absolutely brilliant, look it up.
Xbox 360 is much much faster than the PS3 and actually does have better graphics it can handle and probably gives the Nexus a beating on the graphics side, but loading and general useage as a pc and it'd be useless.
Venekor said:
No way does the RSX put out 1.8 Tflops....
It's basically 6800SLI which gets nowhere near that, the 580 doesn't even get that lol.
The Cell is an overhyped CPU that failed to deliver and in reality CPUs like the 360s Xeon and the I7s we have today are so much better for gaming. Developers just complain about the amount of code the Cell needs compared to conventional CPUs and how it takes too much time. Doesn't matter what you say about it in theory, in practice it costs too much money to develop on and it cost Sony the console war. Fact is we've not see the PS3 out perform the 360, the GPU inside the 360 can push more pixels, has access to more memory too. Games like uncharted use so much trickery to make them look good, I don't understand why people make a big deal out of it, have you seen the obviously jpeg like skyboxes all over it?
Graphics wise the phones are already there, what they lack in power they make up for in memory and new shaders and features to make the games look better. Mobile GPUs also push games at higher framerates and use AA which consoles lack most of the time due to memory constraints. Instead their games use post processing effects which blur everything out and make it look ****. Also mobile games run at 60FPS where as most console games are around 30fps or even lower.
CPU wise mobiles are getting there but still far off, we see the next gen of Arm chips getting close to the I3.
The biggest constraint of the Mobiles though is battery.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Regarding GPU power: Nowadays it's still ~ a factor of 10. It is a really rough number but I often measured something like this when comparing GPU performance of iOS/Android devices and consoles/mid PC systems. Modern games still do a lot more than mobile games regarding rendering (shadows, global illumination, screen scape effects like SSAO, etc, etc). But mobile GPUs will get better and better. See e.g. the roadmap from NVIDIA and the comparison with current console generation:
http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/0...el-performance-from-mobile-gpus-in-2013-2014/
biffsmash said:
Lets be honest, PS3 games are absolutely shocking. They have so much screen tear, not to mention the actual graphics are completely and utterly awful. It takes an age to load, even it's own dashboard. Xbox 360 is better but still, consoles we have today are absolutely light years behind PC's and even the processors we have in our phones outshine them.
You can quote all the nonsense giga flop teraflop data you want, you would be all talking out your behinds because consoles struggle with the games they have, and with skyrim as an example, are completely and utterly chopped down to run, when compared to the unlocked PC versions with the proper textures.
I have yet to find a PS3 game to run in 1080p which is what it should be coping with, and the 720p games are awful both performance wise, and graphics wise.
As for mobiles on a big screen tv, the LG optimus 3G hooked up to 40 inch hd tv gaming is absolutely brilliant, look it up.
Xbox 360 is much much faster than the PS3 and actually does have better graphics it can handle and probably gives the Nexus a beating on the graphics side, but loading and general useage as a pc and it'd be useless.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually PS3 has v-sync enabled for lots of games which means no screen tear.
And no, the Xbox doesn't have better graphics. If Uncharted wasn't enough, take a look at Heavy Rain or The Last of Us.
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app
---------- Post added at 03:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:04 PM ----------
noname81 said:
Regarding GPU power: Nowadays it's still ~ a factor of 10. It is a really rough number but I often measured something like this when comparing GPU performance of iOS/Android devices and consoles/mid PC systems. Modern games still do a lot more than mobile games regarding rendering (shadows, global illumination, screen scape effects like SSAO, etc, etc). But mobile GPUs will get better and better. See e.g. the roadmap from NVIDIA and the comparison with current console generation:
http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/0...el-performance-from-mobile-gpus-in-2013-2014/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Got to agree with this. Mobile games often have just a lot of pointless effects which make them look beautiful.
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app